THe chance to win 100,000 dollars NO BS NO TROLL if you can prove this statment wrong

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: THe chance to win 100,000 dollars NO BS NO TROLL if you can prove this statment w

Sanity? Sorry, but I don’tremember having such a uselessthing in the first place.

Re: THe chance to win 100,000 dollars NO BS NO TROLL if you can prove this statment w

legalizing it would bring allot of pros to the world.
first of all: You're more able to control it and sustain it (drug traffic, drug gangs, etc..)
The government can make tons of money out of it on taxes alone, and even decrease the now
know prices on the cannabis market.
Last but not least...
If everybody would smoke some now and then, people would be allot friendlier
to eachother

Re: THe chance to win 100,000 dollars NO BS NO TROLL if you can prove this statment w

Originally Posted by BREAKD

legalizing it would bring allot of pros to the world.
first of all: You're more able to control it and sustain it (drug traffic, drug gangs, etc..)
The government can make tons of money out of it on taxes alone, and even decrease the now
know prices on the cannabis market.
Last but not least...
If everybody would smoke some now and then, people would be allot friendlier
to eachother

Thats partially true man, did you know that the cartels are hoping for legalization because if that happens then it will be easier for them to croos products over. worse of all they can grow it themselves in the us and and make more profit. Not only that the government doesnt know how to properly tax cannibis for the fact that it isnt easy measuring cannibis. They wont know if they tax by the grams or by the bud itself. Im all for the legalization however there are problems to it being legalized. If you really want to smoke it just head over to Colorado or Washington. Those are your best bets

Re: THe chance to win 100,000 dollars NO BS NO TROLL if you can prove this statment w

All those stuff are bad for your lungs/body and I'm glad I stop doing them.
Only the ignorant would think it's alright to do it and it's safe.
It's false to say weed isn't harmful.
And that's a fact.

Though it's your right to do what ever you want with your body,but it isn't right to give out false information about smoking.

I've been to a hospital a week ago and met this guy that needs to breath with an oxygen tank and carry it around. I talked to him and he told me that if you didn't quit at a early age,you're going to regret it later on in your life. And all he smoked was weed in his youth and his lungs are failing him due to the build up of tar,etc.

I have friends who smoke either just weed or both weed/cigs that are having problems breathing at their 20's / 30's

Do whatever you want but if you were smart,you will stop drinking and smoking.

Re: THe chance to win 100,000 dollars NO BS NO TROLL if you can prove this statment w

Originally Posted by Mattyj420

this is real and if anyone wants to refute what cannabis should stay Illegal i can change your mind if this cant

People like you annoy the shit out of me.

The peanut.

Cotton.

Just about any plant can be refined and processed into a wide range of useful substances. The thing that these fools forget to realize is that hemp cannot provide the world's needs simultaneously. The amount of biomass necessary to produce the world's energy supply would consume just about all the farmable land on the planet. Period. Only a minimal amount of non-alcohol producing compounds could be processed out of the biomass necessary to provide power - and it would -not- be able to provide for the world's clothing needs.

Not to mention lubrication for industrial processes (some of which have no water-based equivalents and can only be derived from longer polymer chains that will have to be engineered if not processed out of crude oil).

This ignorant argument is just insulting to the human intelect and is grounds for a trial of annihilation, in my opinion. Anyone of this school of thought needs their blood line purged from existence.

That said:

This is the problem with the pot-heads who make this argument. They feel they need to justify their behavior and, deep down, realize their actions are not a positive reflection of their character.

The argument for legalizing marijuana is very, very simple: "Alcohol has similar effects to THC in terms of reducing comprehension and motor-skill function. Some studies even show alcohol to be more severe. It is legal. Further, the nature of marijuana makes it a difficult substance to control and all laws attempting to control its manufacture are doomed to failure and inconsistent enforcement. Its illegal status and availability put individuals who use it or seek it into contact with underground networks that often contain supplies of other drugs, such as derivatives of methamphetamine, and a legal status would avoid that problem, entirely."

That's it. -Bam- ... Cannabis becomes legal, don't come to work high (just as you don't come to work drunk), and be contientious of those around you when you smoke (any substance). Better yet - oil extracts of THC could, then, become legal and used in sugars and other goods that do not require one to inhale smoke for the 'benefits' of marijuana (because smoking as a medicine is fairly retarded and anyone suggesting it deserves to be beaten mercilessly with a baseball bat). For those who find they need the quick-hit found from inhalation methods - vaporizers can be used (just like those "e-cigs").

Re: THe chance to win 100,000 dollars NO BS NO TROLL if you can prove this statment w

Originally Posted by Aim64C

People like you annoy the shit out of me.

The peanut.

Cotton.

Just about any plant can be refined and processed into a wide range of useful substances. The thing that these fools forget to realize is that hemp cannot provide the world's needs simultaneously. The amount of biomass necessary to produce the world's energy supply would consume just about all the farmable land on the planet. Period. Only a minimal amount of non-alcohol producing compounds could be processed out of the biomass necessary to provide power - and it would -not- be able to provide for the world's clothing needs.

Not to mention lubrication for industrial processes (some of which have no water-based equivalents and can only be derived from longer polymer chains that will have to be engineered if not processed out of crude oil).

This ignorant argument is just insulting to the human intelect and is grounds for a trial of annihilation, in my opinion. Anyone of this school of thought needs their blood line purged from existence.

That said:

This is the problem with the pot-heads who make this argument. They feel they need to justify their behavior and, deep down, realize their actions are not a positive reflection of their character.

The argument for legalizing marijuana is very, very simple: "Alcohol has similar effects to THC in terms of reducing comprehension and motor-skill function. Some studies even show alcohol to be more severe. It is legal. Further, the nature of marijuana makes it a difficult substance to control and all laws attempting to control its manufacture are doomed to failure and inconsistent enforcement. Its illegal status and availability put individuals who use it or seek it into contact with underground networks that often contain supplies of other drugs, such as derivatives of methamphetamine, and a legal status would avoid that problem, entirely."

That's it. -Bam- ... Cannabis becomes legal, don't come to work high (just as you don't come to work drunk), and be contientious of those around you when you smoke (any substance). Better yet - oil extracts of THC could, then, become legal and used in sugars and other goods that do not require one to inhale smoke for the 'benefits' of marijuana (because smoking as a medicine is fairly retarded and anyone suggesting it deserves to be beaten mercilessly with a baseball bat). For those who find they need the quick-hit found from inhalation methods - vaporizers can be used (just like those "e-cigs").

These are primarily triglyceride esters derived from plants and animals. For lubricant base oil use the vegetable derived materials are preferred. Common ones include high oleic canola oil, castor oil, palm oil, sunflower seed oil and rapeseed oil from vegetable, and Tall oil from tree sources. Many vegetable oils are often hydrolyzed to yield the acids which are subsequently combined selectively to form specialist synthetic esters. Other naturally derived lubricants include lanolin (wool grease, a natural water repellent).

Whale oil was a historically important lubricant, with some uses up to the latter part of the 20th century as a friction modifier additive for automatic transmission fluid.[3]

In 2008, the biolubricant market was around 1% of UK lubricant sales in a total lubricant market of 840,000 tonnes/year.[4]

Lanolin is a natural water repellent, derived from sheep wool grease, and is an alternative to the more common petro-chemical based lubricants. This lubricant is also a corrosion inhibitor, protecting against rust, salts, and acids.
"

The bold should give an indication of what kind of scale we are talking about.

Then, there is the fact that many of the newer bioplastics and other bio-whatsits are hybrids. The biomass-derived extracts serve largely as filler for the petroleum compounds:

"A new family of polyolefin “bio-composites” with 10% to 40% renewable content based on plant matter is new from Biobent Polymers, Marysville, Ohio. Biobent is a new division of Univenture in Marysville, an injection molder and fabricator of document binders, mailers, disc packaging, and other plastic storage products. Biobent’s new Panacea blends of PP, HDPE, and LDPE with finely ground soy meal are intended to overcome two previous hurdles to renewable plastics."

.
.
.
"They require predrying, because the soy content absorbs moisture. Temperature must be controlled in processing to avoid overcooking the compound, which causes darkening, but Biobent sources say the high flow of the material allows use of lower-than-normal melt temperatures. Battelle’s tests reportedly show that Panacea compounds can be reprocessed and show no warpage from exposure to humidity. Because of the possibility of microbial attack, these materials are not currently recommended for food-contact or medical uses."

Re: THe chance to win 100,000 dollars NO BS NO TROLL if you can prove this statment w

To be sure - hemp has uses. All plants have uses, and many plants are unique in the range of various compounds they produce that can be turned into industrially viable products. But it's not a miracle plant to be worshipped.

Re: THe chance to win 100,000 dollars NO BS NO TROLL if you can prove this statment w

Originally Posted by Aim64C

People like you annoy the shit out of me.

The peanut.

Cotton.

Just about any plant can be refined and processed into a wide range of useful substances. The thing that these fools forget to realize is that hemp cannot provide the world's needs simultaneously. The amount of biomass necessary to produce the world's energy supply would consume just about all the farmable land on the planet. Period. Only a minimal amount of non-alcohol producing compounds could be processed out of the biomass necessary to provide power - and it would -not- be able to provide for the world's clothing needs.

Not to mention lubrication for industrial processes (some of which have no water-based equivalents and can only be derived from longer polymer chains that will have to be engineered if not processed out of crude oil).

This ignorant argument is just insulting to the human intelect and is grounds for a trial of annihilation, in my opinion. Anyone of this school of thought needs their blood line purged from existence.

That said:

This is the problem with the pot-heads who make this argument. They feel they need to justify their behavior and, deep down, realize their actions are not a positive reflection of their character.

The argument for legalizing marijuana is very, very simple: "Alcohol has similar effects to THC in terms of reducing comprehension and motor-skill function. Some studies even show alcohol to be more severe. It is legal. Further, the nature of marijuana makes it a difficult substance to control and all laws attempting to control its manufacture are doomed to failure and inconsistent enforcement. Its illegal status and availability put individuals who use it or seek it into contact with underground networks that often contain supplies of other drugs, such as derivatives of methamphetamine, and a legal status would avoid that problem, entirely."

That's it. -Bam- ... Cannabis becomes legal, don't come to work high (just as you don't come to work drunk), and be contientious of those around you when you smoke (any substance). Better yet - oil extracts of THC could, then, become legal and used in sugars and other goods that do not require one to inhale smoke for the 'benefits' of marijuana (because smoking as a medicine is fairly retarded and anyone suggesting it deserves to be beaten mercilessly with a baseball bat). For those who find they need the quick-hit found from inhalation methods - vaporizers can be used (just like those "e-cigs").